Sebeok etl. Sty tin Kanquayar o , OR YA E Beanie Hea York Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics Wty, 1460 ‘be protected by copytoht Gow (THe UWS Codd Vavenne SY ' ROMAN JAKOBSON Fortunately, scholarly and pol “The eucvess of a political convention depends om the gencral agreeaicat tthe majority or totaty of its participants. The we af votes and vetoes, however, is alien 10 scholarly discussion where proves to be more productive than agreement Petinomics and tensions within the field discussed and calls for novel eaploration. Not politial conferences hut rather exp oratory ati fica present an analogy {0 scholarly mectings: sernational experts j jn variogs disciplines attempt to map an unknown ‘where the greatest obstacles forthe explorer 3 nd precipices. Such a mapping seems to have been ihe cist task of our Ant I conferences have xothingin common. reement gen Disigeee ly nt discloses i region and find out | he insurmountable peaks | conference, and i this respect ite work has been quite suecessful. Hase we set realized what peoblems are the most crucial ard the most contro~ rersial? Have we not aso learned how to switch ‘expound oF even 10 ‘void in order to prevent misanderstandings with Feoplewsing diferent departmental jargon? Sach questions, live for reer of the members of this conference, if not for a of them, are some : twhat clearer toy than they were three days ago. T have been asked for sutnmary remarks about poctics in its relation 19 linguistics, Pe ics deals. primarily with the question, hat makes @ esha! message a work of art? Because the main sutject of poetics #6 the Ufeenta specifica of verbal act in relation to other arts and i elation to ‘other Kinds of verbal behavior, poetics is entitled tothe leading place in | titerary stwies. Poetics deals with problems of verbal structure, just as the analysis of painting is concerned wi lobal science of verbal structure, Petorial structure. Since linguistics is the pocties may be regarded as an integral part of linguistics. "Arguments against such a claim must be thorovghly discussed. Ut is evident that many devices studied by poctics are not confined to verbal ‘3 motion picture, See We can refer to the possibilty of transposing ushering Hig into ‘medieval legends into frescoes and miniatures, of However Leprismidi d'un foue into music, ballet, and gaphic at fudicrous may appear the idea of the Miad and Odyssey in comics, certain 290 tos Statement: Linguistics and Poetics 38h sjactttfestres oftheir pot are preserved despite the disappearance “Tripoe verbal shape. ‘The question whether Blake's illustration tothe Srna Commedia ate of ave not adequate isa proof that diferent ars are cinparshie, ‘The problems of harogue oF any other historia! style Teeegten the fame of a single art. When handling the sureaitic rcatcor, we could hardly pass by Max Ernst’ pictures or Luis Dats Tune Tie Andatsion Dog and The Golden Age. In short many poetic features belong not ony fo the science of Tanguage but to the whole theary of signs; that's, t0 general semiotics, This safement, However, is a nt anly Tor verbat art but ako forall varieties of Iguage since Tinuage shares many properties wih some other systems af signs or even ‘sth al of them (pansemini etme. Likewise a second objection cotsins nothing that would be specific for the question of tlatons between the word and the world Concerts not ony verbal art but actly al kinds of discourse, Linguistics ic heay to explore al possible problems of reaion between discourse and thevunicesc discouree™s what of ths univers is vrbaliced by a given Taceurse snd ow i it verbatized. The tath values, however, a8 Fa as they aree-to say with the logicans—"extralinguistie enti,” obviously texceed the bouts of poctice and of linguistics in generat Sometimes we eat that octcs, in contradisinction to guises, is conccraed with evalation. This separation of the to Felis fom each Sthor i Baced on a current but erroneous interpretation of the contrast Strvcen ane srnctare of poetry and othr ypes of verbal structure: the Ther ave sid to be opposed ty thsi “casual desgness nature to the oncasel" purpoxt character of poeticlangvags. 1m point of fat 209] Jota Behavior ie goaldirectd, bt the aims are dierent and the con Tormaty ofthe meas sed tothe effect aimed a is problem that evermore pronenpie ingtrers into the diverse kinds of verbal communication | Fraga elce correspondence. much closer than ers believe, between ne guetta inguite phenovtena expanding in space and tne and the shat and temporal spread of iterary models. Even such dscentinious sretnsion a the resurrection of neglected o forgotten poets—fr insane, Tar Rottamous discovery and subsequent canenzation af Gerard Manley Honine (8 189), the tardy fame of Laureamont (4 1870) among eereet poets, andthe salen influence ofthe hitherto ignored Cyprian Nocaid (2 1863) on Polish modern poctry—fnd a parallel athe story Te standard languages which ae prone to revive outdated models, some Ste lane Forget, ay was the eae in terary Czech which toward the tepioning of the minelenth century leaned to sintenth century models. Untortunately the terminologial confusion of "iterary stugis™ with srticlam’ tempts the student of Reratre to replace the description of literature:32 Retrospects and Prospects the intsine values ofa rary work by 9 sje, enoious vei Mahe sian cre” apie fo an invesigtor of Meratare a ae an estat (oleae maul be ape toatingnt Saree any Srorphologie retereh cant be sopiarid by a nomative aeaere rnd ikewke no manteso, fing a eis own tale and Fer on arene Hertre, may ac aswel for a0 objective srety only af verbal sit Tet statement nt (0 Be maken Teen gait pane of lasses Jv any verbal cule Toes 1 ghia planing ormatie eieavore_ Yet hy i 9 clearcut Shimon male Nicene al spd Ings of eos nts a enh i tess Hera) Tamer se, wih poste 9 th foal portion cons Me bi gute toseivatprelens: yoskon/anddnebron. Thespebrone serelos stag not eny the ceary proton cay en sags pest porte erry wadiion sh or thesia Glcton Faust onator hasbeen eed Thor isane Shakespeare on Tho oaihand and Dome, Mare Keats and Ely Dickinson onthe Merc expenved hy the preset English poate wi, where the ee thonton and Longfellow. forte dine ein. do 0 Gone sable arin salves ‘Te seletion of ec aa et se tyre! tand in subsiantal pot of reo Heeary Matic sychrome poets ike syncrone ing. no To bs cone used with statics: any stage discriminates between more conservative and exe Inno forme, “Any contemporary stage sepricned i 8 tempat dys anon the ther nd, th sonal appa Fah reece a hace concern mt ony nth changes ut also fale actor. A thorogly compechensive toc pate or tistny of language a sprite (be Pail on 3 Taugeaceon fering foc par rom Hingis is waraned nly vgn the ek OF ngs apea to be iy rest Fr eka THEE Me ecntence viewed hy some Kings ae the high analyeabe Tetretionorwken te snp of ngs econiedto grammar sone Smgety to nonce questions fen frn oo he nvenory works of orders vies with wo ence oe ato Versi ot Steny pointed out ihe two most important and este probs i faa seeural igus, nomely arson ofthe moneihichypothess ‘language ands conera with itrdependenc of ivrse strates Slinat ove tanguoge™ No Gout, fr any speech community for any Teter there ests unity o fangusge, bu ih overateode erent 2 {Rie ot mtereonected bubcods: cach Inguageeecompsss seer hcurentptterns which are each characered by = ilrentfortion. Closing Statement: Linguistles ond Poeties 353 Obsiously we must agree with Sapir that, on the whole, “idcation reigns supreme in language... "48), but this supremacy does not authorize linguistics to disregard the “secondary factors.” The emotive elements of speech which, as Jo0s is prone fo believe, cannot be described “with a Finite number of absolute categories,” are classified by him “as non- Jinguistic elements of the real world.” Hence, “for us they remiain vague, protean, fluctuating phenomena,” he concludes, “which we refuse t0 tolerate in our science" (218). Joos is indeed a brilliant expert in reduction experiments, and his emphatic requirement for an “expulsion” of the emotive cements “from linguistic science” is a radical experiment ia reduction—redluetio ad asurdn, Language must be investigated in all the variety ofits functions, Refore discussing the poetic function we must deine its pl Functions of language. An outline of these functions demands 2 concise survey of the constitutive fctors in any speech event, in any act of verbal communication, The appresser sends a AISSAGE 10 the ADDRESStE. To be operative the message requires 2 Conrrxr referred £0 “referent” in another, Somentiat ambiguous, nomenclature), scizable by the addressee, and verbal or capable of being vertalized; a CODE fully, oF at least lly, common to the addresser and addressee (or in other words, {0 ); and, finally, a CONTACT, a physical channel and psychological connection between the addrester and the addressee, enabling both of them to enter and stay in communication. All these factors inalicnably involved in verbal communication may be schematized 25 follows: ‘CONTEXT MESSAGE, CONTACT ‘cone, ADDRESSER ADDRESSEE Fach of these six factors determines a different function of language. Although we distinguish six basie aspects of language. we coulll however, hardly find verbal messages that would fulfill oaly one function. The diversity lies not in a monopoly of some one ofthese several functions but in a different hierarchical order of functions. ‘The verbal structure of a _message depends primarily on the predominant function, But even though, a set (Einscellung) toward the referent, an orieatation toward the COMtEXT —bricfly the so-called RETERENTIAL, “denotative,” “cognitive” function— is the leading task of numerous messages, the accessory pasticipation of the fther functions in such messages must be taken into account by the ‘observant linguist354 Retrospects ond Prospects The so-called rMorive or “expressive” Function, focused on the ADoRESSIR, aims a diet expression of the speaker's altitude toward what his spezking about. It tends to produce an impression ofa certain emo~ tion whether true or feigned; therefore, the term “emotive,” Iaunched and advocated by Marty (269) has. proved (o be preferable (0 “emotional. ‘The purely emotive siratum in language it presented by the intrjections. They differ from the means of referential language bott by their sound pattern (peculiar sound sequences or even sounds elsewhere unusual) and by their syntactic role (they are not components but equivalents of sentences). “Tut! Tut! said McGinty”: the complete utterance of Conan Doyle's character consists of two suction clicks. The emotive function, Iaid bare in the interjcetions, favors to some extent all our utterances, fon their phonic, graramatical, and lexical level. If we analyze language from the standpoint ofthe information it carries, we cannot restrict the notion of information to the cognitive aspect af language. A man, using expressive features to indicate his angry or ironic atitude, conveys ‘ostensible information, and evidently this verbal behavior cannot be likened to such nonsemiotic, nutritive activities as “cating grapetrvi (espite Chatman’s bold simile). The difference between [big] and the emphatic prolongation of the vowel [bi:g} is a consentianal, coded Tinguiatie feature like thé difference between the nd Tong vowel in such Czech pairs 28 [4] "you’ and [vir] “knows, but in the latter pair the differential information is phonemic and in the former emotive. As long a we are interested in phonemic invariant, the English ft and /i/ appeae to be mere variants of one and the sarne phoneme, but if we are concerned wilh emotive units, the relation between tHe invariant and variants is seversed: length and shortness are invariants implemented hy variable phonemes. Saporta’s surmise that emotive difference is @ nonlinguistic Feature, "attributable 1o the delivery of themsessage andnotto themessape, arbitrarily reduces the informational eapacity of messag ‘A former actor of Stanislavskij's Moscow Theater told me how at his audition he was asked by the famous director to make forty diffsrent rmessuges from the phrase Segodaja eeverom "This evening, by diversi’ying its expressive tint. He made alist of some forty emotional situations, then emitted the given phrase in accordance with cach of these sitiitions, which his audience had to recognize only from the changes in the sound shape of the same two words. For our rescarch work in the description and analysis of contemporary Standard Russian (under th auspices of the Rockefeller Foundation) this actor was asked to repeat Stonislasskij’s test. He wrote down some iifly situations framing the same elliptic senlence and made of it fifty corresponding messages for a tape record. Most of the messages were correctly and circumstanti:ly decoded by Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics 335 Moscovite listeners. May 1 add that all such emotive cues easily undergo linguistic analysis ‘Orientation toward the ADRESSE, the CONATIVE function, finds purest grammatical expression in the vocative and. imperative, which syntactically, morphologically, and often even phonemically deviate com ‘other nominal and verbal eategories. The imperative sentences cardinally dlilfr from declarative sentences: the ter ate and the former are rot table to teu test. Whe in O'Neill's play The Fountain, Nano, “(in a fierce tone of commund),” says “Drink!” —the imperative cannot be challenged by the question “is it true or not" which may be, however, perfectly well asked after such sentences a8 “one drank," “one will dink,” “one would drink.” In contradstinetion to the imperative sentences, the declarative sentences are convertible into interrogaive sentences: “did ane drink?" “will one drink?" "would one drink > The traditional model of language as clucidated particularly by Buhler (S1) Was confined to these three functions—emotive, conative, and referenlial—and the three apetes of this model—the fst person of the addessr, the second person of the addressee, and the “third person,” properly-someone of something spoken of. Certain additional verbal Fanetions ean be easily infered from this triadic model. Thus the mac, incantatory foreion i chiefly some kind of conversion of an absent oF inaninate adres uf wunative nage. May this sty dey up fe fa of, se (Lithuanian spell: 266, p. 6). “Wate, «queen river, dayheeak! Send grief beyond the be sa. tothe sea-battom, like a grey stone never trie from the sea-hottom. may grief never come to buen the light heart of God's servant, may grief be removed and sink aovay.” (North Russian incantation: MA, p. 27). "Sun, std thou stil upot Gibcon: and thou, Moon, i the valley of Aja-lon, And the uw ‘ood sil, the moon stayed --." Josh. 10.12). We observe, howeve, Uhves furier constitutive factors of verbal communication and thice cortesponding Functions of language ‘There are messages primarily serving to establish, to prolong, orto dite continue communication, to check whether the chanel works (“Hetlo, do you hear me?"), to attract the attention ofthe interlocutor oF toconfirm his ontinucd attention ("Are you listening?” or in Shakespearean ction, “Lend me your ears!"—and on the other end of the wire “Um-hum!") ‘This set for CONTACT, oF in Malinowski's terms pitatic function (264), ray be displayed by & profes exchange of tualized formas, by entre Giatogues withthe mere purport of prolonging communication. Dorothy Prker caught eloquent examples: "Well? the young man sid. “Well!” she said, “Well, hereweare; he aid. ‘Here we are she said, “Aren't weT™ “L should say we were,’ he sai, “Eeyop! Here We are." “Well” she said